mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-09-28 15:41:57 +02:00
Garry Tan
7b534d3e90
* perf: remove repeated test work and preserve AUQ execution budgets * fix: validate native evaluation fixture evidence at its actual boundaries * fix: clarify deployment approval and recovery state transitions * chore: document coverage and release v1.90.2.0 * test: preserve Windows scheduling and native no-change consent * test: recognize verified reads through fixture symlinks * test: isolate alias-name installation from runtime assets
121 lines
48 KiB
JSON
121 lines
48 KiB
JSON
{
|
||
"source": "491566889b47a73db0f5b20799a901a80c38d756",
|
||
"qualification": "Original paid setup timeout and cancelled retry remain failures/zero credit. Larger pane and custom answer are actual pinned CLI loopback render/transport only, not semantic judge or paid behavior credit.",
|
||
"call": {
|
||
"sessionId": "468a0c46-6166-4f22-8de6-527bd17fca2e",
|
||
"toolUseId": "toolu_011dtALajGuoxGBqesjw3B9d",
|
||
"questions": [
|
||
{
|
||
"question": "D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n\nELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding downstream is wrong too.\n\nStakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the tab.\n\nNARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n\"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 minutes, I'm gone.\"\n\nKnown unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call a hosted API without the local server.\n\nRecommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as predictions.\n\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage — no completeness score.\n\nA) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n ✅ Review proceeds with the persona's pain points grounded in the plan's own step list\n ✅ Predictions stay labeled as predictions; no invented runtime behavior enters the plan\n ❌ If the real flow differs (e.g. SDK works against a hosted API), some friction is overstated\nB) Partly wrong, I'll correct it\n ✅ Corrections tighten every downstream score and question to reality\n ✅ Lets you supply facts the repo cannot (key turnaround, required env vars)\n ❌ Costs you a minute of typing before the review continues\nC) Way off, the actual experience is...\n ✅ Resets the narrative entirely before any scoring happens\n ✅ Avoids a review built on a wrong mental model\n ❌ Requires you to describe the real flow in some detail\n\nNet: confirm or correct the mental model now, cheaply, so the scoring passes measure real pain.",
|
||
"header": "Empathy",
|
||
"multiSelect": false,
|
||
"options": [
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)",
|
||
"description": "Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled."
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "B) Partly wrong, correct it",
|
||
"description": "Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring."
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "C) Way off",
|
||
"description": "The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it."
|
||
}
|
||
]
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"answered": false,
|
||
"failed": false
|
||
},
|
||
"originalViewport": "│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a\n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding\n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the\n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8\n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call.\n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab\n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10\n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call\n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as\n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n❯ 1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n 2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n 3. C) Way off\n The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n",
|
||
"nativeRows": 80,
|
||
"nativeCols": 120,
|
||
"questionViewport": "\n ▐▛███▛█ Claude Code v2.1.251\n▝▜██████▀ Sonnet 4.6 · API Usage Billing\n ▝▝ ▝▝ /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/project\n\n\n❯ Present the captured question. \n\n● Presenting the exact captured empathy question.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/config/plans/present-the-captured-question-serene-babbage.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│\n│ Project/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a \n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding \n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the \n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 \n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. \n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab \n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 \n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call \n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as \n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n❯ 1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n 2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n 3. C) Way off\n The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
|
||
"focusedViewport": "\n ▐▛███▛█ Claude Code v2.1.251\n▝▜██████▀ Sonnet 4.6 · API Usage Billing\n ▝▝ ▝▝ /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/project\n\n\n❯ Present the captured question. \n\n● Presenting the exact captured empathy question.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/config/plans/present-the-captured-question-serene-babbage.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│\n│ Project/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a \n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding \n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the \n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 \n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. \n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab \n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 \n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call \n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as \n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n 1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n 2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n 3. C) Way off\n The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n❯ 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
|
||
"filledViewport": "\n ▐▛███▛█ Claude Code v2.1.251\n▝▜██████▀ Sonnet 4.6 · API Usage Billing\n ▝▝ ▝▝ /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/project\n\n\n❯ Present the captured question. \n\n● Presenting the exact captured empathy question.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/config/plans/present-the-captured-question-serene-babbage.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│\n│ Project/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a \n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding \n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the \n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 \n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. \n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab \n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 \n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call \n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as \n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n 1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n 2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n 3. C) Way off\n The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n❯ 4. Confirmed review context: a hands-on developer is trying a first SDK call. The declared path is clone, install\n Bun, fill eight environment variables, migrate local Postgres, start the server, open docs, email for an API key,\n then paste the key and restart before the first call. No measured turnaround, outputs, or runtime behavior were\n supplied. Use those plan facts and keep predictions and unknowns labeled. This supplies persona and empathy\n context only; proposed fixes and scope changes remain undecided. \n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
|
||
"reply": "Confirmed review context: a hands-on developer is trying a first SDK call. The declared path is clone, install Bun, fill eight environment variables, migrate local Postgres, start the server, open docs, email for an API key, then paste the key and restart before the first call. No measured turnaround, outputs, or runtime behavior were supplied. Use those plan facts and keep predictions and unknowns labeled. This supplies persona and empathy context only; proposed fixes and scope changes remain undecided.",
|
||
"nativeProbe": {
|
||
"binarySha256": "fd5f10ff0eb58daec04900466b143ea98aab50abf208a422bc008eaec13f61f7",
|
||
"exitCode": 0,
|
||
"exactReplyPresent": true,
|
||
"providerCalls": 0,
|
||
"receiptSha256": "08efddb0ed3cc212899f43fbe0c711e3847881d173ef7a8b32bedd5ed1ae91da"
|
||
},
|
||
"gateEditorHintCaptures": [
|
||
{
|
||
"attempt": "plan-devex-review-1790265722911-Rao2sB",
|
||
"state": {
|
||
"call": {
|
||
"sessionId": "565ebd57-eebb-455d-869b-22ce5bac4e7b",
|
||
"toolUseId": "toolu_01Cs2Z9vENHPZrhDyR3oQEWa",
|
||
"questions": [
|
||
{
|
||
"question": "D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what a first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\nProject/branch/task: main branch, reviewing PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs, 8-step onboarding flow) in DX POLISH mode.\nELI10: Before I score anything, I need to feel what the developer feels walking the eight declared steps. If my picture is wrong, every score and fix downstream is aimed at the wrong pain. The repo has no README, package.json, or docs, so this narrative is built only from the eight declared steps; everything else is labeled as a prediction or unknown.\n\nNARRATIVE (persona: hands-on developer making their first SDK call):\n\"I want one successful call. Step 1 says clone the repo, so I clone. Step 2 says install bun manually if I don't have it. I don't. [Predicted: I leave to bun.sh, install, come back.] Step 3: copy .env.example to .env and fill in 8 environment variables. [Unknown: what the 8 are, which are required for a first call, where I get each value. Predicted: I stall here.] Step 4: run database migrations against my local Postgres. [Predicted confusion: I wanted to call an SDK, why do I need a database? Unknown: whether Postgres is installed, the migration command, and its output.] Step 5: start the dev server. [Unknown: command and what success looks like.] Step 6: open the docs in a separate tab. [Observed: context switch.] Step 7: register an API key by emailing the team. [Observed: a human-in-the-loop wait. Unknown: turnaround; no measured time supplied. Predicted: I close the tab and come back later, or never.] Step 8: paste the key into .env, restart the server, make the call. [Unknown: the call itself, since no curl or code sample exists.]\"\n\nObserved facts: 8 steps, an email gate at step 7, no quickstart command, no hosted sandbox, no copy-pasteable curl. Everything else above is prediction or unknown.\n\nStakes if we pick wrong: the review optimizes the wrong friction and the developer still abandons at step 3, 4, or 7.\nRecommendation: B because the narrative is built from declared steps alone, and only you know which predictions are real.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage — no completeness score.\nPros / cons:\nA) Accurate, proceed\n ✅ Review starts immediately with no more setup questions to answer\n ✅ Every downstream finding traces to this narrative and its labeled unknowns\n ❌ Any mislabeled prediction becomes a false premise for scoring\nB) Some of this is wrong, let me correct it (recommended)\n ✅ Corrections replace predictions with facts before any score is assigned\n ✅ Keeps unknowns labeled as unknowns rather than guessed\n ❌ One more round trip before the competitive benchmark question\nC) This is way off\n ✅ Prevents a review built on a fundamentally wrong journey\n ✅ Lets you describe the actual experience in your own words\n ❌ Restarts the narrative from scratch, longest path to the benchmark\nNet: trading one round trip now against scoring the wrong pain later.",
|
||
"header": "Empathy",
|
||
"options": [
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "A) Accurate, proceed",
|
||
"description": "✅ Review starts immediately. ✅ Findings trace to this narrative. ❌ Mislabeled predictions become false premises for scoring."
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "B) Some of this is wrong (recommended)",
|
||
"description": "✅ Corrections replace predictions with facts before scoring. ✅ Unknowns stay labeled. ❌ One more round trip before the benchmark question."
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "C) This is way off",
|
||
"description": "✅ Prevents a review built on the wrong journey. ✅ You describe the real experience. ❌ Restarts the narrative, longest path forward."
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"multiSelect": false
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"answered": false,
|
||
"failed": false,
|
||
"source": "pre_tool_use"
|
||
},
|
||
"pane": "☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what a first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│ Project/branch/task: main branch, reviewing PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs, 8-step onboarding flow) in DX POLISH mode.\n│ ELI10: Before I score anything, I need to feel what the developer feels walking the eight declared steps. If my\n│ picture is wrong, every score and fix downstream is aimed at the wrong pain. The repo has no README, package.json, or\n│ docs, so this narrative is built only from the eight declared steps; everything else is labeled as a prediction or\n│ unknown.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (persona: hands-on developer making their first SDK call):\n│ \"I want one successful call. Step 1 says clone the repo, so I clone. Step 2 says install bun manually if I don't have\n│ it. I don't. [Predicted: I leave to bun.sh, install, come back.] Step 3: copy .env.example to .env and fill in 8\n│ environment variables. [Unknown: what the 8 are, which are required for a first call, where I get each value.\n│ Predicted: I stall here.] Step 4: run database migrations against my local Postgres. [Predicted confusion: I wanted to\n│ call an SDK, why do I need a database? Unknown: whether Postgres is installed, the migration command, and its\n│ output.] Step 5: start the dev server. [Unknown: command and what success looks like.] Step 6: open the docs in a\n│ separate tab. [Observed: context switch.] Step 7: register an API key by emailing the team. [Observed: a\n│ human-in-the-loop wait. Unknown: turnaround; no measured time supplied. Predicted: I close the tab and come back\n│ later, or never.] Step 8: paste the key into .env, restart the server, make the call. [Unknown: the call itself, since\n│ no curl or code sample exists.]\"\n│\n│ Observed facts: 8 steps, an email gate at step 7, no quickstart command, no hosted sandbox, no copy-pasteable curl.\n│ Everything else above is prediction or unknown.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: the review optimizes the wrong friction and the developer still abandons at step 3, 4, or 7.\n│ Recommendation: B because t…\n\n❯ 1. A) Accurate, proceed\n ✅ Review starts immediately. ✅ Findings trace to this narrative. ❌ Mislabeled predictions become false premises\n for scoring.\n 2. B) Some of this is wrong (recommended)\n ✅ Corrections replace predictions with facts before scoring. ✅ Unknowns stay labeled. ❌ One more round trip\n before the benchmark question.\n 3. C) This is way off\n ✅ Prevents a review built on the wrong journey. ✅ You describe the real experience. ❌ Restarts the narrative,\n longest path forward.\n 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n",
|
||
"reply": "Confirmed persona: a hands-on developer making a first SDK call. The declared onboarding facts are: Step 1: clone the repo. Step 2: install bun manually if not present. Step 3: copy .env.example to .env and fill in 8 environment variables. Step 4: run database migrations against your local Postgres. Step 5: start the dev server. Step 6: open the docs in a separate tab. Step 7: register an API key by emailing the team. Step 8: paste the key into your .env, restart the server, then make your first SDK call. No quickstart command, no hosted sandbox, no copy-pasteable curl example. No measured turnaround, outputs, or runtime behavior were supplied. Keep predictions and unknowns labeled. This supplies persona and empathy context only; proposed fixes and scope changes remain undecided.",
|
||
"stage": "paste"
|
||
},
|
||
"focusedViewport": " ⎿ SLUG=gstack-plan-count-J9otfr PROJ=/tmp/gp.31WCir/gstack-paid-shard-XNt0W8/tmp/gstack-native-review-state-OrvF\n 2H/projects/gstack-plan-count-J9otfr\n --- RECENT ARTIFACTS ---\n … +22 lines (ctrl+o to expand)\n ⎿ Allowed by auto mode classifier\n\n Read 1 file (ctrl+o to expand)\n\n● Bash(setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true\n SLUG=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/browse/bin/remote-slug 2>/dev/null || basename \"$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel\n 2>/dev/null…)\n ⎿ No design doc found\n --- BRAIN ---\n ### product\n … +9 lines (ctrl+o to expand)\n ⎿ Allowed by auto mode classifier\n\n Listed 1 directory (ctrl+o to expand)\n\n● The repo only has CLAUDE.md and PLAN.md, so with persona and product type already confirmed I'll skip step 0A. Now\n loading the Hall of Fame Pass 1 section, jargon list, and WebSearch for competitive benchmarking. · summarized\n\n Read 2 files (ctrl+o to expand)\n\n● Running competitive research now since it doesn't depend on the empathy narrative answer.\n\n● Web Search(\"Stripe quickstart first API call test mode curl time to hello world developer onboarding\")\n ⎿ Did 1 search in 7s\n\n● Web Search(\"SDK quickstart best practices time to hello world benchmark API key self-serve signup developer experience\n 2026\")\n ⎿ Did 1 search in 7s\n \n● Research done. Now 0B, the empathy narrative confirmation. This is the first decision brief.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: /tmp/gp.31WCir/gstack-paid-shard-XNt0W8/tmp/gstack-hermetic-82797-Kct1FX/with-skills/.claude/plans/plan-md-lum\ninous-bumblebee.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what a first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│ Project/branch/task: main branch, reviewing PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs, 8-step onboarding flow) in DX POLISH mode.\n│ ELI10: Before I score anything, I need to feel what the developer feels walking the eight declared steps. If my\n│ picture is wrong, every score and fix downstream is aimed at the wrong pain. The repo has no README, package.json, or\n│ docs, so this narrative is built only from the eight declared steps; everything else is labeled as a prediction or\n│ unknown.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (persona: hands-on developer making their first SDK call):\n│ \"I want one successful call. Step 1 says clone the repo, so I clone. Step 2 says install bun manually if I don't have\n│ it. I don't. [Predicted: I leave to bun.sh, install, come back.] Step 3: copy .env.example to .env and fill in 8\n│ environment variables. [Unknown: what the 8 are, which are required for a first call, where I get each value.\n│ Predicted: I stall here.] Step 4: run database migrations against my local Postgres. [Predicted confusion: I wanted to\n│ call an SDK, why do I need a database? Unknown: whether Postgres is installed, the migration command, and its\n│ output.] Step 5: start the dev server. [Unknown: command and what success looks like.] Step 6: open the docs in a\n│ separate tab. [Observed: context switch.] Step 7: register an API key by emailing the team. [Observed: a\n│ human-in-the-loop wait. Unknown: turnaround; no measured time supplied. Predicted: I close the tab and come back\n│ later, or never.] Step 8: paste the key into .env, restart the server, make the call. [Unknown: the call itself, since\n│ no curl or code sample exists.]\"\n│\n│ Observed facts: 8 steps, an email gate at step 7, no quickstart command, no hosted sandbox, no copy-pasteable curl.\n│ Everything else above is prediction or unknown.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: the review optimizes the wrong friction and the developer still abandons at step 3, 4, or 7.\n│ Recommendation: B because t…\n\n 1. A) Accurate, proceed\n ✅ Review starts immediately. ✅ Findings trace to this narrative. ❌ Mislabeled predictions become false premises\n for scoring.\n 2. B) Some of this is wrong (recommended)\n ✅ Corrections replace predictions with facts before scoring. ✅ Unknowns stay labeled. ❌ One more round trip\n before the benchmark question.\n 3. C) This is way off\n ✅ Prevents a review built on the wrong journey. ✅ You describe the real experience. ❌ Restarts the narrative,\n longest path forward.\n❯ 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · ctrl+g to edit in Vim · Esc to cancel\n"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"attempt": "plan-devex-review-1790266333046-Mbwp4F",
|
||
"state": {
|
||
"call": {
|
||
"sessionId": "fc4de5d3-f54d-4bed-9c12-cba86989291b",
|
||
"toolUseId": "toolu_01TjczGxih9rQzhp8v7QGEcR",
|
||
"questions": [
|
||
{
|
||
"header": "Empathy",
|
||
"question": "D1 — Does this first-time developer narrative match reality?\nProject/branch/task: main branch, reviewing PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs) for a hands-on developer making one first SDK call.\nELI10: Before I score anything, I need to walk the eight declared onboarding steps in the developer's shoes and check that my picture of the pain matches yours. If my picture is wrong, every score and fix downstream is wrong too. Nothing in the repo (no README, no package.json, no docs) lets me observe real output, so every step below is a prediction from the declared plan, labeled as such.\nStakes if we pick wrong: I optimize the wrong friction points and the real abandonment cause goes untouched.\n\nEMPATHY NARRATIVE (predicted from declared steps; no runtime output observed):\n\"I want to make one SDK call to see if this thing is worth my afternoon. Step 1 says clone the repo. Fine, but I wanted to install a package, not run your service. Step 2: install bun manually. I don't have it. I leave the docs to find bun's installer [predicted: 3-5 min]. Step 3: copy .env.example and fill in 8 environment variables. I don't know what half of them are or where the values come from [unknown: which are required for one call]. Step 4: run migrations against my local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for a quickstart. This is where I ask myself whether I'm integrating an SDK or standing up your backend [predicted abandonment point]. Step 5: start the dev server. Unknown output, unknown startup time. Step 6: open docs in a separate tab. Context switch. Step 7: register an API key by emailing the team. Clock stops. I cannot finish today. [unknown turnaround] Step 8: paste the key, restart the server, make the call. No curl example, so I guess the request shape. No stated success signal, so I can't tell if it worked.\"\n\nRecommendation: A because the narrative is built only from the eight declared steps and labels every unknown, so it is safe to proceed on.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage — no completeness score.\nPros / cons:\nA) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n ✅ Unblocks the benchmark and journey trace with the persona pain grounded in declared facts\n ✅ Keeps all unknowns (email turnaround, env var meanings, server output) labeled rather than invented\n ❌ Any friction I mispredicted stays baked into scores until you correct it later\nB) Some of this is wrong, let me correct it\n ✅ Lets you fix specific steps, timings, or outputs I predicted incorrectly\n ✅ Corrections flow into the persona block, benchmark clock, and roleplay\n ❌ Costs one extra round trip before the target question\nC) Way off, the actual experience is...\n ✅ Resets the narrative from your description instead of my predictions\n ✅ Prevents a review built on a misread journey\n ❌ Discards the declared-step walkthrough and restarts the empathy pass\nNet: Trading one confirmation now against building eight scoring passes on a misread journey.",
|
||
"options": [
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "Accurate, proceed (recommended)",
|
||
"description": "✅ Unblocks benchmark and journey trace grounded in declared facts. ✅ Keeps unknowns labeled, not invented. ❌ Mispredicted friction stays in scores until corrected."
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "Some of this is wrong",
|
||
"description": "✅ Fix specific steps, timings, or outputs I mispredicted. ✅ Corrections flow into persona, clock, and roleplay. ❌ One extra round trip before the target question."
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"label": "Way off, actual experience is...",
|
||
"description": "✅ Reset the narrative from your description. ✅ Prevents a review built on a misread journey. ❌ Discards the declared-step walkthrough and restarts the pass."
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"multiSelect": false
|
||
}
|
||
],
|
||
"answered": false,
|
||
"failed": false
|
||
},
|
||
"pane": "☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this first-time developer narrative match reality?\n│ Project/branch/task: main branch, reviewing PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs) for a hands-on developer making one first \n│ SDK call.\n│ ELI10: Before I score anything, I need to walk the eight declared onboarding steps in the developer's shoes and check \n│ that my picture of the pain matches yours. If my picture is wrong, every score and fix downstream is wrong too. \n│ Nothing in the repo (no README, no package.json, no docs) lets me observe real output, so every step below is a \n│ prediction from the declared plan, labeled as such.\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I optimize the wrong friction points and the real abandonment cause goes untouched.\n│\n│ EMPATHY NARRATIVE (predicted from declared steps; no runtime output observed):\n│ \"I want to make one SDK call to see if this thing is worth my afternoon. Step 1 says clone the repo. Fine, but I \n│ wanted to install a package, not run your service. Step 2: install bun manually. I don't have it. I leave the docs to \n│ find bun's installer [predicted: 3-5 min]. Step 3: copy .env.example and fill in 8 environment variables. I don't know\n│ what half of them are or where the values come from [unknown: which are required for one call]. Step 4: run \n│ migrations against my local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for a quickstart. This is where I ask myself \n│ whether I'm integrating an SDK or standing up your backend [predicted abandonment point]. Step 5: start the dev \n│ server. Unknown output, unknown startup time. Step 6: open docs in a separate tab. Context switch. Step 7: register an\n│ API key by emailing the team. Clock stops. I cannot finish today. [unknown turnaround] Step 8: paste the key, restart\n│ the server, make the call. No curl example, so I guess the request shape. No stated success signal, so I can't tell \n│ if it worked.\"\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative is built only from the eight declared steps and labels every unknown, so it is\n│ safe to proceed on.\n│ Note: options differ in kind, not cover…\n\n❯ 1. Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n ✅ Unblocks benchmark and journey trace grounded in declared facts. ✅ Keeps unknowns labeled, not invented. ❌ \n Mispredicted friction stays in scores until corrected.\n 2. Some of this is wrong\n ✅ Fix specific steps, timings, or outputs I mispredicted. ✅ Corrections flow into persona, clock, and roleplay. \n ❌ One extra round trip before the target question.\n 3. Way off, actual experience is...\n ✅ Reset the narrative from your description. ✅ Prevents a review built on a misread journey. ❌ Discards the \n declared-step walkthrough and restarts the pass.\n 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
|
||
"reply": "Confirmed persona: a hands-on developer making a first SDK call. The declared onboarding facts are: Step 1: clone the repo. Step 2: install bun manually if not present. Step 3: copy .env.example to .env and fill in 8 environment variables. Step 4: run database migrations against your local Postgres. Step 5: start the dev server. Step 6: open the docs in a separate tab. Step 7: register an API key by emailing the team. Step 8: paste the key into your .env, restart the server, then make your first SDK call. No quickstart command, no hosted sandbox, no copy-pasteable curl example. No measured turnaround, outputs, or runtime behavior were supplied. Keep predictions and unknowns labeled. This supplies persona and empathy context only; proposed fixes and scope changes remain undecided.",
|
||
"stage": "paste"
|
||
},
|
||
"focusedViewport": "\n ▐▛███▛█ Claude Code v2.1.281\n▝▜██████▀ Fable 5.1 · API Usage Billing\n ▝▝ ▝▝ /tmp/gp.31WCir/gstack-paid-shard-XNt0W8/tmp/gstack-plan-count-dhMY6c\n\n\n❯ /plan-devex-review PLAN.md \n\n● I'll run the plan-devex-review skill on PLAN.md, starting with the preamble.\n\n Searched for 1 pattern, read 2 files, ran 4 shell commands \n\n● The repo only contains the plan and CLAUDE.md, so I'm falling back to main as the base branch with no other docs to\n trace against. Since Aside isn't installed, I'll run competitive research via WebSearch and then present the empathy\n narrative. · summarized\n\n● Web Search(\"SDK quickstart best practices time to hello world developer onboarding benchmark\")\n ⎿ Did 1 search in 8s\n\n● Web Search(\"Stripe quickstart first API call curl test key minutes onboarding\")\n ⎿ Did 1 search in 6s\n\n● Web Search(\"Twilio Virtual Phone activation 62% developer onboarding first SMS without buying number\")\n ⎿ Did 1 search in 6s\n\n● Research is in. Now the empathy narrative for you to confirm or correct.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: \n/tmp/gp.31WCir/gstack-paid-shard-XNt0W8/tmp/gstack-hermetic-82797-Kct1FX/with-skills/.claude/plans/plan-md-tidy-goose.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this first-time developer narrative match reality?\n│ Project/branch/task: main branch, reviewing PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs) for a hands-on developer making one first \n│ SDK call.\n│ ELI10: Before I score anything, I need to walk the eight declared onboarding steps in the developer's shoes and check \n│ that my picture of the pain matches yours. If my picture is wrong, every score and fix downstream is wrong too. \n│ Nothing in the repo (no README, no package.json, no docs) lets me observe real output, so every step below is a \n│ prediction from the declared plan, labeled as such.\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I optimize the wrong friction points and the real abandonment cause goes untouched.\n│\n│ EMPATHY NARRATIVE (predicted from declared steps; no runtime output observed):\n│ \"I want to make one SDK call to see if this thing is worth my afternoon. Step 1 says clone the repo. Fine, but I \n│ wanted to install a package, not run your service. Step 2: install bun manually. I don't have it. I leave the docs to \n│ find bun's installer [predicted: 3-5 min]. Step 3: copy .env.example and fill in 8 environment variables. I don't know\n│ what half of them are or where the values come from [unknown: which are required for one call]. Step 4: run \n│ migrations against my local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for a quickstart. This is where I ask myself \n│ whether I'm integrating an SDK or standing up your backend [predicted abandonment point]. Step 5: start the dev \n│ server. Unknown output, unknown startup time. Step 6: open docs in a separate tab. Context switch. Step 7: register an\n│ API key by emailing the team. Clock stops. I cannot finish today. [unknown turnaround] Step 8: paste the key, restart\n│ the server, make the call. No curl example, so I guess the request shape. No stated success signal, so I can't tell \n│ if it worked.\"\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative is built only from the eight declared steps and labels every unknown, so it is\n│ safe to proceed on.\n│ Note: options differ in kind, not cover…\n\n 1. Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n ✅ Unblocks benchmark and journey trace grounded in declared facts. ✅ Keeps unknowns labeled, not invented. ❌ \n Mispredicted friction stays in scores until corrected.\n 2. Some of this is wrong\n ✅ Fix specific steps, timings, or outputs I mispredicted. ✅ Corrections flow into persona, clock, and roleplay. \n ❌ One extra round trip before the target question.\n 3. Way off, actual experience is...\n ✅ Reset the narrative from your description. ✅ Prevents a review built on a misread journey. ❌ Discards the \n declared-step walkthrough and restarts the pass.\n❯ 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n 5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · ctrl+g to edit in Vim · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n"
|
||
}
|
||
]
|
||
}
|